POHAP SINGH Vs. MOHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts out of which this appeal arises are these: Behari Singh was the occupancy tenant of a certain plot. He was succeeded as occupancy tenant by Jodha Singh. Jodha Singh alone was occupancy tenant of that plot. No one shared in his cultivation. He introduced Parbat Singh and Mohan Singh as his sub-tenants. Afterwards he left the village. A considerable number of years after he had left the: village, Parbat Singh, Khub Singh and Tikam Singh obtained the entry of their names as occupancy tenants, and in a suit under Section 95 of the Tenancy Act, secured a decree as against the Zemindar to the effect that they were occupancy tenants of the plots. Parbat Singh and Mohan Singh continued to cultivate the plot and paid the rent, according to their allegation, to the Zemindar. In, the suit out of which this appeal arises, Khub Singh, and Tikam Singh have sued to eject Parbat Singh and Mohan. Singh in the Revenue Court. Khub Singh and Tikam Singh asserted that they were the occupancy tenants of the plot and that Parbat Singh and Mohan Singh were their sub-tenants. The written statement which was filed by the defendants is as follows: 1. The plaintiffs are, not competent to bring the suit. The claim is liable to be struck off.

(2.) The relation of landlord and tenant does not exist between the parties.

(3.) The suit is not cognizable by a Revenue Court.